- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:49:46 -0000
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "'Bryan Rasmussen'" <brs@itst.dk>
- Cc: "'Pete Cordell'" <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> For what it's worth, I think those of us who are active in > designing the > schema language are well aware of the good reasons why co-occurrence > constraints are important, and that XML Schema 1.0 does not provide > adequate support for them. Our ability to do better in > future versions > of the Schema language, and to have improvements out in a > timely manner, > will depend to a significant extent on the degree to which > W3C members contribute the staffing needed in the workgroup to do the > necessary design and specification. I think a number of working groups are struggling with similar resource problems. Perhaps it's time to try a different model, one based more on open email discussion. There are lots of small companies, especially outside the US*, who simply cannot afford the time and international travel needed to attend WG meetings regularly (or indeed the costs of joining W3C), but who still have ideas to contribute. As an experiment, try setting up an email-based group tasked to develop a design for co-occurrence constraints as an enhancement to XML Schema. The result would still have to be approved and integrated by the WG using its conventional processes, but there's no reason why the design work shouldn't be done in a different forum. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ * I don't know what the situation is on the Schema WG. On the XSL and XQuery WGs, 80-90% of the meetings are held in North America, and most members from outside North America have gradually dropped out. In an electronic age, there must be a more economical and more inclusive way of doing business.
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2005 14:44:55 UTC